Texans vs New England Patriots Match Player Stats
The texans vs new england patriots match player stats provide a detailed look at how the New England Patriots defeated the Houston Texans 28-16 in the AFC Divisional Playoffs on January 19, 2026, according to the supplied ESPN box score data. New England secured the victory through efficient passing, three touchdown passes from Drake Maye, and a defense that recorded four interceptions. Houston showed flashes of offensive potential, but turnovers and limited rushing production made it difficult to keep pace.
This matchup offers more than a final score. The individual performances reveal how quarterback decisions, receiving efficiency, defensive pressure, and possession management influenced the result. C.J. Stroud finished with 212 passing yards but threw four interceptions, while Maye produced 179 passing yards and three touchdown passes. New England also gained 105 rushing yards, compared with Houston’s 48, giving the Patriots another way to control the game.
In this detailed breakdown, we examine the final score, quarterback statistics, rushing and receiving performances, defensive contributions, special teams, and the most important statistical differences between the two teams. All game figures below are based on the data provided from ESPN’s box score. The analysis distinguishes recorded statistics from interpretation so readers can understand both what happened and why the numbers matter.
Texans vs New England Patriots Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The AFC Divisional Playoff contest ended with New England winning 28-16. Although Houston scored in the first three quarters, the Texans failed to add points in the fourth quarter. New England, meanwhile, used a strong second quarter and a late touchdown to maintain its advantage.
Game at a glance
New England Patriots
28
14-3 record
Houston Texans
16
12-5 record
Competition
AFC Divisional Playoffs
Date
January 19, 2026
Winning quarterback
Drake Maye
Houston quarterback
C.J. Stroud
Source data: ESPN box score supplied for this analysis.
Final score by quarter
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Total |
| Houston Texans | 3 | 7 | 6 | 0 | 16 |
| New England Patriots | 7 | 14 | 0 | 7 | 28 |
The second quarter was the defining scoring period. New England scored 14 points while Houston added seven, creating a 21-10 halftime lead for the Patriots. Houston narrowed the difference with six third-quarter points, but New England’s fourth-quarter touchdown restored a comfortable margin.
The quarter-by-quarter figures also highlight Houston’s biggest problem: the Texans could not turn their third-quarter progress into a sustained scoring threat. In a postseason game, failing to score in the final quarter becomes especially costly when the opposing team can protect its lead.
Team performance comparison
| Statistical category | Houston Texans | New England Patriots |
| Final points | 16 | 28 |
| Passing yards | 212 | 179 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 | 3 |
| Interceptions thrown | 4 | 1 |
| Rushing attempts | 22 | 32 |
| Rushing yards | 48 | 105 |
| Yards per carry | 2.2 | 3.3 |
| Receiving yards | 212 | 179 |
| Receiving touchdowns | 1 | 3 |
| Sacks recorded by defense | 5 | 3 |
| Interceptions recorded by defense | 1 | 4 |
| Field goals made | 3 | 0 |
| Extra points made | 1 | 4 |
The comparison illustrates why total passing yards alone do not explain a football result. Houston gained 33 more passing yards than New England, yet the Patriots scored 12 more points. The difference came from how effectively each offense converted opportunities into touchdowns and how well each team protected possession.
Houston’s three successful field goals produced nine points, while its only passing touchdown and one extra point accounted for seven more. New England, by contrast, scored four touchdowns and converted all four extra points. That scoring efficiency helped the Patriots overcome their lower passing-yard total.
Quarterback Stats: C.J. Stroud vs Drake Maye
Quarterback performance is central to understanding this matchup. Both players faced defensive pressure, but their passing results differed sharply in efficiency and ball security.
| Passing statistic | C.J. Stroud | Drake Maye |
| Completions | 20 | 16 |
| Attempts | 47 | 27 |
| Completion percentage | 42.6% | 59.3% |
| Passing yards | 212 | 179 |
| Yards per attempt | 4.5 | 6.6 |
| Passing touchdowns | 1 | 3 |
| Interceptions | 4 | 1 |
| Sacks taken | 3 | 5 |
| Yards lost on sacks | 19 | 36 |
| ESPN QBR | 22.2 | 20.7 |
| Passer rating | 28.0 | 100.7 |
Completion percentages are calculated from the supplied completions and attempts and rounded to one decimal place.
C.J. Stroud’s performance
Stroud completed 20 of 47 passes for 212 yards, one touchdown, and four interceptions. His 42.6% completion rate shows how difficult it was for Houston to maintain consistent passing success.
The most damaging statistic was the interception total. Four interceptions mean that Houston repeatedly ended possessions without giving its offense the opportunity to finish a drive. Against a team that scored four touchdowns, those lost possessions placed additional pressure on the Texans to make up ground with fewer opportunities.
Stroud averaged 4.5 yards per passing attempt. This figure is important because it combines the volume of throws with their overall yardage production. Even with 47 attempts, the Texans generated only 212 passing yards. That works out to approximately 4.5 yards per attempt, suggesting that Houston’s passing game struggled to create enough value from its opportunities.
His three sacks for 19 yards lost also affected the offense. Sacks can push an offense into longer third-down situations, reduce the effectiveness of the running game, and make a comeback more difficult. However, the sack total alone does not explain every unsuccessful play. Coverage, route execution, pressure, and quarterback decisions can all contribute to a stalled drive.
Stroud’s statistical line does not mean that every interception was solely his fault. Evaluating responsibility for individual turnovers requires reviewing the actual plays, including the intended receiver, defensive coverage, pressure, and any tipped passes. What the box score establishes is that Houston finished with four interceptions thrown, a major disadvantage in a playoff game.
Drake Maye’s performance
Maye completed 16 of 27 passes for 179 yards and three touchdowns. His completion percentage was 59.3%, and he averaged 6.6 yards per attempt.
Although Maye produced fewer passing yards than Stroud, his touchdown output was substantially higher. Three touchdown passes on 27 attempts represent a touchdown rate of 11.1%. Stroud’s one touchdown on 47 attempts represents a rate of approximately 2.1%.
This contrast explains why Maye’s passing performance was more productive in terms of scoring. New England did not need to accumulate as many passing yards because it converted a larger share of its opportunities into touchdowns.
Maye also threw one interception. That turnover still mattered, but it was fewer than Stroud’s four interceptions. Limiting turnovers gave New England a better chance to preserve possession and maintain control of the game.
There is one important qualification: Maye took five sacks for a loss of 36 yards, compared with Stroud’s three sacks for 19 yards. The Patriots’ passing offense was not immune to pressure. New England compensated through touchdown production and a more effective rushing attack.
Why the passer ratings tell different stories
Stroud’s passer rating was 28.0, while Maye’s was 100.7. These ratings reflect a combination of passing efficiency measures, including completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdown rate, and interception rate.
Maye’s three touchdown passes and single interception supported a much stronger traditional passer rating. Stroud’s four interceptions, low completion percentage, and lower yards per attempt sharply reduced his figure.
The supplied ESPN QBR figures show a different comparison: 22.2 for Stroud and 20.7 for Maye. QBR and traditional passer rating are not interchangeable statistics. They use different methods, and QBR is intended to evaluate quarterback contributions in a broader game context. The small difference between these two QBR figures should not be interpreted as proof that Stroud played better overall.
The practical lesson is that no single quarterback metric explains an entire performance. Passing volume, scoring efficiency, turnovers, sacks, rushing contributions, and game situation all provide useful context.
Rushing Stats: Patriots Gain the Ground Advantage
The rushing comparison was one of the clearest differences in the game. New England recorded 105 rushing yards on 32 attempts, while Houston managed 48 yards on 22 attempts.
| Rushing statistic | Houston Texans | New England Patriots |
| Team carries | 22 | 32 |
| Team rushing yards | 48 | 105 |
| Average per carry | 2.2 | 3.3 |
| Longest run | 10 yards | 20 yards |
| Rushing touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
New England gained 57 more rushing yards and recorded 10 additional rushing attempts. Its 3.3 yards per carry exceeded Houston’s 2.2-yard average.
These numbers suggest that the Patriots were better able to use their running game to complement their passing attack. A productive ground game can help an offense stay ahead of the chains, create manageable passing situations, and consume time when protecting a lead.
Houston’s rushing production was more limited. Averaging 2.2 yards per carry made it harder to use running plays to maintain offensive balance. When the ground game produces little, an offense can become increasingly dependent on passing, which can make defensive coverage and pressure more effective.
Rhamondre Stevenson leads New England
Rhamondre Stevenson led the Patriots with 16 carries for 70 yards. He averaged 4.4 yards per carry and recorded a longest run of 20 yards.
Stevenson accounted for two-thirds of the Patriots’ 105 team rushing yards. His 70-yard total gave New England a reliable source of production without requiring every offensive possession to depend on Maye’s arm.
The 20-yard longest run also shows that Stevenson created at least one substantial gain. A single long run does not establish that the offense consistently dominated every rushing situation, but it demonstrates the ability to produce an explosive play.
Stevenson did not score a rushing touchdown in the supplied statistics. His value was primarily in moving the ball and supporting the overall offensive plan.
TreVeyon Henderson’s contribution
Henderson recorded 12 carries for 25 yards, averaging 2.1 yards per carry. His longest run was six yards.
His average was lower than Stevenson’s, which shows that the Patriots’ rushing production was not equally efficient across both runners. Even so, Henderson’s 12 carries contributed to the team’s 32 total attempts and helped spread the workload.
His statistics also underline why team averages can hide individual differences. New England’s overall average of 3.3 yards per carry was supported by Stevenson’s stronger production, while Henderson had a more difficult statistical outing.
C.J. Stroud and the Houston rushing effort
Stroud added 11 rushing yards on two carries, averaging 5.5 yards per carry. His longest run was 10 yards.
Those two carries provided some ground production, but they were not enough to transform Houston’s overall rushing numbers. Woody Marks, the team’s leading rusher by attempts, recorded 17 yards on 14 carries, averaging only 1.2 yards per carry.
Nick Chubb added 14 yards on four attempts, while Cade Stover contributed six yards on two carries. Marks’ workload was the largest among the listed Houston rushers, but his limited average indicates that those attempts produced little yardage.
A balanced offense generally benefits when the running game can generate enough yards to keep defenses from focusing primarily on the pass. In this matchup, Houston’s rushing output offered limited support for Stroud, making the passing game even more important.
Receiving Stats: The Most Productive Pass Catchers
Receiving statistics reveal which players converted targets into catches and which players generated the greatest yardage. The Patriots had 179 receiving yards and three receiving touchdowns, while the Texans accumulated 212 yards and one receiving touchdown.
The difference was not total receiving yardage. Houston actually gained more. New England’s advantage came from turning its receiving production into more touchdowns.
Houston Texans receiving leaders
| Player | Receptions | Targets | Receiving yards | Average per catch | Touchdowns | Longest catch |
| Jayden Higgins | 6 | 10 | 59 | 9.8 | 0 | 16 |
| Dalton Schultz | 2 | 2 | 47 | 23.5 | 0 | 42 |
| Xavier Hutchinson | 4 | 13 | 44 | 11.0 | 0 | 23 |
| Harrison Bryant | 3 | 6 | 21 | 7.0 | 0 | 9 |
| Christian Kirk | 2 | 6 | 20 | 10.0 | 1 | 10 |
| Woody Marks | 2 | 3 | 19 | 9.5 | 0 | 13 |
| Cade Stover | 1 | Not listed | 2 | 2.0 | 0 | 2 |
Target counts are shown where supplied. An omitted target count should not be treated as zero.
Jayden Higgins leads Houston in receiving yards
Higgins caught six passes for 59 yards on 10 targets. He led the Texans in both receptions and receiving yards among the listed players.
His 9.8 yards per reception provided useful production, but he did not score a touchdown. His six catches also show that he was a regular part of Houston’s passing effort, even though the overall offense struggled to turn completed passes into points.
A receiver’s contribution cannot be judged solely by touchdowns. Catches that sustain drives, convert first downs, or create favorable field position can still be important. However, in this particular game, Houston needed more of its passing production to lead directly to scoring opportunities.
Dalton Schultz delivers Houston’s longest catch
Schultz recorded two receptions for 47 yards, averaging 23.5 yards per catch. His longest reception was 42 yards.
His low reception count combined with high yardage indicates that one significant play accounted for most of his production. A 42-yard reception can change field position quickly and create a scoring opportunity.
Yet Schultz did not record a touchdown in the supplied data. His performance demonstrates the difference between creating a big play and completing a scoring drive. Long receptions are valuable, but teams must still capitalize on the field position they create.
Xavier Hutchinson’s target volume
Hutchinson finished with four receptions for 44 yards on 13 targets. He averaged 11.0 yards per catch.
His 13 targets were the highest listed total for a Houston receiver. Four catches from 13 targets equate to a reception rate of approximately 30.8% for those targets.
That figure requires careful interpretation. Targets do not always represent identical opportunities, and the box score does not show whether a pass was inaccurate, contested, disrupted by pressure, or deliberately thrown away. Still, the gap between 13 targets and four catches highlights an area where Houston’s passing offense did not produce consistent returns.
Christian Kirk provides Houston’s receiving touchdown
Kirk recorded two catches for 20 yards and one touchdown. His longest reception was 10 yards.
He was the only listed Houston receiver with a receiving touchdown. That score helped keep the Texans competitive, but the team needed more scoring contributions from the passing game to match New England’s three touchdown receptions.
Kirk’s statistics also illustrate how touchdown value differs from yardage value. A receiver can lead a team in yardage without scoring, while another player can make a smaller number of catches but produce a touchdown that directly adds to the scoreboard.
New England Patriots receiving leaders
| Player | Receptions | Targets | Receiving yards | Average per catch | Touchdowns | Longest catch |
| Kayshon Boutte | 3 | 5 | 75 | 25.0 | 1 | 32 |
| Stefon Diggs | 4 | 6 | 40 | 10.0 | 1 | 14 |
| DeMario Douglas | 2 | 2 | 36 | 18.0 | 1 | 28 |
| Austin Hooper | 1 | 2 | 14 | 14.0 | 0 | 14 |
| Rhamondre Stevenson | 4 | 4 | 11 | 2.8 | 0 | 9 |
| Hunter Henry | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5.0 | 0 | 5 |
| TreVeyon Henderson | 1 | 2 | -2 | -2.0 | 0 | -2 |
Kayshon Boutte produces the biggest receiving total
Boutte led New England with 75 receiving yards on three receptions from five targets. He averaged 25.0 yards per catch and scored one touchdown.
His average was more than twice Higgins’ 9.8 yards per reception, although the players had different workloads and roles. Boutte’s figures suggest that his catches generated substantial yardage, including a longest reception of 32 yards.
His touchdown was particularly valuable because New England had three passing scores overall. Boutte was one of three Patriots receivers listed with a receiving touchdown, alongside Diggs and Douglas.
Stefon Diggs provides reliable production
Diggs caught four passes for 40 yards on six targets and scored one touchdown. His average was 10.0 yards per reception.
His four catches tied Stevenson for the highest reception total among the listed New England players. Unlike a receiver who produces most of his yardage on one catch, Diggs spread his contribution across multiple receptions.
The touchdown also meant that his role was not limited to moving the chains. He contributed directly to New England’s scoring advantage.
DeMario Douglas makes his opportunities count
Douglas caught two passes for 36 yards on two targets, scoring one touchdown. His 18.0 yards per reception reflected strong yardage production on a small number of opportunities.
A two-for-two target line indicates that both recorded targets resulted in catches. His 28-yard longest reception accounted for a substantial portion of his total yardage.
Douglas’ touchdown is another example of the Patriots converting relatively limited receiving volume into points. The offense did not need one receiver to dominate every category because multiple players contributed to the scoring total.
Why receiving efficiency mattered more than raw yardage
Houston’s receiving unit produced 212 yards, 33 more than New England’s 179. Yet Houston had one receiving touchdown compared with the Patriots’ three.
This difference points to the importance of situational execution. Receiving yards can accumulate between the 20-yard lines without necessarily becoming points. Touchdown receptions, by contrast, finish drives.
The numbers do not reveal every factor behind the outcome, such as the exact coverage on each play or the number of red-zone opportunities. They do show that New England’s receiving production was more closely connected to scoring.
For readers comparing player performances, the most useful approach is to consider receptions, targets, yards, yards per catch, touchdowns, and the final result together rather than ranking players by one statistic alone.
Defensive Player Stats: The Decisive Difference
The defensive numbers provide one of the clearest explanations for New England’s victory. The Patriots recorded four interceptions, including one returned for a touchdown, while Houston recorded one interception. New England’s defenders also registered 14 passes defended and nine quarterback hits, compared with Houston’s six passes defended and two quarterback hits.
These statistics indicate that the Patriots repeatedly disrupted Houston’s passing game. Interceptions ended Texans possessions, while pass breakups and quarterback hits made it harder for Stroud to complete throws comfortably.
Team defensive comparison
| Defensive statistic | Houston Texans | New England Patriots |
| Total tackles | 76 | 67 |
| Solo tackles | 41 | 38 |
| Sacks | 5 | 3 |
| Tackles for loss | 9 | 6 |
| Passes defended | 6 | 14 |
| Quarterback hits | 2 | 9 |
| Interceptions | 1 | 4 |
| Interception return yards | 0 | 26 |
| Interception return touchdowns | 0 | 1 |
Houston recorded more sacks and tackles for loss, showing that the Texans’ defense generated some pressure and disrupted plays behind the line of scrimmage. Nevertheless, New England’s superior interception total and pass defense had a greater direct impact on the scoreboard.
The Patriots’ nine quarterback hits are particularly notable alongside their four interceptions. They suggest that Houston faced repeated disruption in the passing game, although the box score alone cannot establish that pressure directly caused every interception.
Will Anderson Jr. leads Houston’s sack production
Will Anderson Jr. recorded three sacks, three solo tackles, two tackles for loss, and one quarterback hit.
His three sacks represented the largest individual sack total among the listed defenders. Those plays helped Houston limit New England’s passing opportunities and contributed to the team’s five total sacks.
Danielle Hunter added two sacks, four total tackles, four solo tackles, one tackle for loss, and one quarterback hit. Anderson and Hunter therefore accounted for all five Houston sacks listed in the player statistics.
This was a meaningful defensive contribution, but the Texans’ pass rush could not eliminate New England’s scoring efficiency. The Patriots still produced three touchdown passes and four total touchdowns.
Azeez Al-Shaair leads Houston in tackles
Al-Shaair finished with nine total tackles and four solo tackles, leading Houston in total tackles among the listed players.
Henry To’oTo’o recorded eight tackles, four solo tackles, one tackle for loss, and one pass defended. Tommy Togiai also finished with eight tackles, including three solo tackles and one tackle for loss.
These performances show that Houston had defenders making repeated stops. Tackles are important, but their value depends on the situation. A tackle that prevents a first down on third-and-long has a different impact from one that occurs after an offense has already gained the yards it needs.
The supplied statistics do not provide the full down-and-distance context for each tackle, so they cannot establish precisely how many of these plays stopped promising New England drives.
Christian Gonzalez tops New England’s tackle chart
Gonzalez recorded nine total tackles and six solo tackles, making him New England’s listed defensive leader in total tackles.
Carlton Davis III also had a notable performance. He recorded four total tackles, all solo, along with one tackle for loss and four passes defended. His four pass breakups were particularly relevant in a game where New England finished with 14 passes defended as a team.
Craig Woodson recorded five tackles, three passes defended, and one quarterback hit. Anfernee Jennings added five tackles, one sack, one tackle for loss, and one quarterback hit. K’Lavon Chaisson contributed three tackles, one sack, one tackle for loss, one pass defended, and four quarterback hits.
The defensive contribution was spread across multiple players rather than depending entirely on one standout. Some players produced pressure, others disrupted passing lanes, and others contributed through tackles and coverage.
New England’s four interceptions change the game
The Patriots recorded four interceptions, according to the supplied team defensive statistics.
| Player | Interceptions | Return yards | Return touchdowns |
| Carlton Davis III | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Marcus Jones | 1 | 26 | 1 |
| Craig Woodson | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Team total | 4 | 26 | 1 |
Davis accounted for two interceptions, while Jones and Woodson each recorded one. Jones’ interception return added 26 yards and a defensive touchdown.
An interception returned for a touchdown is especially valuable because it does more than prevent the offense from scoring. It adds points directly to the defensive team’s total and removes the need for its offense to complete a scoring drive on that possession.
The exact sequence of the interceptions is not included in the supplied data, so it would be inaccurate to claim that a particular turnover happened at a specific moment or directly caused a particular scoring swing. The aggregate figures nevertheless establish that New England’s defense created multiple possession-changing plays.
Houston’s defensive effort
Houston recorded one team interception, with Ja’Marcus Ingram listed as the interception leader. The supplied data does not show a return touchdown or return yards for the Texans’ interception.
Houston’s defense also produced five sacks. That is a strong individual category on paper, particularly because New England’s offense still scored 28 points. The contrast shows why evaluating a defense requires looking beyond sacks alone.
A defense can pressure a quarterback successfully but still struggle to prevent touchdowns, defend against efficient passing, or force enough turnovers. New England’s 14 passes defended and four interceptions indicate that its coverage unit had a more disruptive impact on Houston’s passing production.
Turnovers and Fumbles: How Possession Affected the Result
Turnovers are among the most important factors in any football game because they remove offensive opportunities and can provide the opposing team with favorable field position. The supplied box score records two Houston fumbles, with one lost, and four New England fumbles, with two lost.
| Turnover statistic | Houston Texans | New England Patriots |
| Fumbles recorded | 2 | 4 |
| Fumbles lost | 1 | 2 |
| Opponent interceptions recorded | 4 | 1 |
| Interception return touchdowns by opponent | 1 | 0 |
Houston’s four interceptions thrown were more damaging than its fumble total alone might suggest. The Texans lost one fumble and threw four interceptions, creating five recorded offensive turnover events when those categories are considered together.
New England’s offense also lost two fumbles and threw one interception, meaning the Patriots were not flawless with possession. Their defense helped compensate by generating four interceptions against Houston.
Why turnovers matter beyond the raw count
Turnovers affect football in several ways:
- Lost scoring opportunities: An intercepted pass or lost fumble ends a possession before the offense can complete its intended drive.
- Field position: The team gaining possession may begin closer to the opponent’s end zone.
- Scoreboard pressure: A team that falls behind may need to pass more frequently and take greater risks.
- Defensive fatigue: Repeatedly returning to the field can place additional demands on a defense.
- Game management: A team protecting a lead can often make more conservative decisions when its opponent struggles to retain possession.
These are general football principles, not claims that every effect occurred on a specific drive in this game. The box score establishes the turnover totals, while the precise consequences of each turnover would require a play-by-play review.
A note on the fumble figures
The supplied ESPN extraction includes player-level recovery entries that do not reconcile perfectly with the team-level fumble figures. For example, it lists multiple recoveries by individual Patriots defenders alongside a team total of three recoveries.
Because these entries may reflect different statistical definitions or extraction issues, the safest approach is to use the supplied team totals for the broad comparison and avoid adding every individual recovery entry together as if all figures were directly interchangeable.
Special Teams Stats: Kicking, Punting, and Returns
Special teams did not produce the largest statistical differences in the matchup, but the numbers help explain how each team managed field position and scoring opportunities.
Kicking statistics
| Kicking category | Houston Texans | New England Patriots |
| Kicker | Ka’imi Fairbairn | Andy Borregales |
| Field goals made | 3 | 0 |
| Field goals attempted | 3 | 0 |
| Field goal percentage | 100% | Not applicable |
| Longest field goal | 51 yards | Not applicable |
| Extra points made | 1 | 4 |
| Extra points attempted | 1 | 4 |
| Total kicking points | 10 | 4 |
Fairbairn converted all three field-goal attempts, including a longest successful kick of 51 yards. Those field goals produced nine points, and his extra point added another point.
Borregales did not attempt a field goal in the supplied statistics, but he converted all four extra points following New England’s touchdowns.
This distinction matters when examining scoring composition. Houston earned 10 points through kicking, while New England earned four. However, the Patriots’ four successful extra points followed four touchdowns, which produced substantially more total points than Houston’s field-goal-based scoring.
Houston’s perfect field-goal record demonstrates accuracy on its three attempts. It does not, by itself, prove that the Texans made the best possible decisions on every drive. Assessing field-goal decisions would require knowing the down, distance, field position, time remaining, and score at each attempt.
Punting comparison
| Punting statistic | Tommy Townsend, Houston | Bryce Baringer, New England |
| Punts | 5 | 8 |
| Total punt yards | 294 | 333 |
| Average punt distance | 58.8 yards | 41.6 yards |
| Longest punt | 72 yards | 55 yards |
| Inside the 20 | 1 | 3 |
| Touchbacks | 0 | 0 |
Townsend averaged 58.8 yards per punt, significantly more than Baringer’s 41.6 yards. Townsend also produced the longer punt, at 72 yards.
Baringer, however, recorded three punts inside the 20-yard line, compared with Townsend’s one. Punting distance and placement are related but different measures. A longer punt may generate substantial distance, while a well-placed punt can pin the opponent near its own end zone.
The numbers therefore show different strengths rather than an entirely straightforward winner. Townsend had the greater average distance, while Baringer recorded more punts inside the 20.
The Patriots’ eight punts also reflect a higher punt count than Houston’s five. Punt totals alone cannot establish which offense was less effective, because possession count, turnovers, scoring drives, and game state influence how often a team punts.
Kick returns
| Return statistic | Houston Texans | New England Patriots |
| Kick returns | 4 | 4 |
| Total return yards | 88 | 89 |
| Average return | 22.0 yards | 22.3 yards |
| Longest return | 26 yards | 25 yards |
| Return touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
The kick-return units performed similarly. Houston recorded 88 yards on four returns, while New England recorded 89 yards on the same number of returns.
The Patriots averaged 22.3 yards per return, compared with Houston’s 22.0. Houston had the slightly longer individual return at 26 yards.
These small differences were not enough to create a major separation in kick-return production. Neither team recorded a kick-return touchdown in the supplied statistics.
Punt returns
| Punt-return statistic | Houston Texans | New England Patriots |
| Punt returns | 3 | 4 |
| Total return yards | 29 | 53 |
| Average return | 9.7 yards | 13.3 yards |
| Longest return | 11 yards | 24 yards |
| Return touchdowns | 0 | 0 |
New England produced 53 punt-return yards on four returns, compared with Houston’s 29 yards on three returns.
The Patriots averaged 13.3 yards per return, a difference of 3.6 yards per attempt compared with Houston. Marcus Jones accounted for all 53 New England punt-return yards in the supplied figures.
This advantage could help the Patriots improve field position, but it should not be treated as a direct explanation for a specific touchdown without the drive-by-drive record. Special teams can influence the conditions for an offensive possession without determining its outcome alone.
The Most Important Statistical Differences
The match becomes easier to understand when its key numbers are grouped by their effect on the final result.
1. Passing touchdowns
New England recorded three passing touchdowns, while Houston recorded one. This two-touchdown difference was central to the scoring gap.
Maye’s touchdown production allowed the Patriots to score efficiently despite having fewer passing yards. Houston generated more passing yardage but did not translate it into as many touchdowns.
2. Interceptions
Stroud threw four interceptions, while Maye threw one. New England also recorded one interception-return touchdown.
This was the clearest possession-related difference in the supplied statistics. Turnovers can erase scoring opportunities and give the opposing team additional chances to build a lead.
3. Rushing production
The Patriots gained 105 rushing yards, compared with Houston’s 48. New England also had 10 more rushing attempts.
The 57-yard rushing advantage gave New England another way to move the ball. Houston’s limited ground production meant that its offense relied more heavily on passing, where the interception problem became especially costly.
4. Pass defense
New England recorded 14 passes defended and nine quarterback hits, while Houston recorded six passes defended and two quarterback hits.
Houston generated more sacks, but New England disrupted more passes and recorded more interceptions. The statistics illustrate the difference between pressuring the quarterback and consistently disrupting the passing game through coverage.
5. Scoring consistency
New England scored in the first, second, and fourth quarters. Houston scored in the first three quarters but failed to score in the fourth.
The Patriots’ 14-point second quarter created a lead that Houston could not overcome. Their final-quarter touchdown then ensured that Houston’s earlier third-quarter points did not turn into a late comeback.
What the Match Stats Reveal About Each Team
What worked for New England?
The Patriots combined efficient passing, productive rushing, and disruptive defense.
Their 6.6 yards per passing attempt exceeded Houston’s 4.5, and Maye threw three touchdowns with one interception. Stevenson added 70 rushing yards, helping the offense avoid relying exclusively on passing.
Defensively, the Patriots’ four interceptions and one interception-return touchdown were significant advantages. Their 14 passes defended suggest that the coverage unit consistently challenged Houston’s passing game.
New England did allow five sacks, so its offensive line and passing protection were not perfect. Still, the team generated enough scoring production to finish with 28 points.
What went wrong for Houston?
Houston’s biggest challenges were turnovers and limited rushing production.
Stroud threw four interceptions, and the Texans averaged just 2.2 yards per carry. Those two factors made it harder to maintain possession and sustain drives.
The Texans still gained 212 passing yards and produced a 42-yard reception by Schultz. Fairbairn also converted all three field goals. These are meaningful positive contributions, but they did not offset the combination of four interceptions, one lost fumble, and only one receiving touchdown.
Houston’s defense produced five sacks, led by Anderson and Hunter, yet the Patriots still scored three passing touchdowns. The defense made disruptive plays but could not consistently prevent New England from converting its opportunities into points.
Why total yards can be misleading
A common mistake in football analysis is assuming that the team with more passing yards or more total activity must have played better offensively.
Houston’s 212 passing yards exceeded New England’s 179. Yet the Patriots scored more touchdowns, committed fewer interceptions, and gained more rushing yards.
This is why a useful statistical analysis separates volume from efficiency. Volume measures how much a team produced. Efficiency helps explain how effectively that production contributed to the goal of scoring points.
In this matchup, the Patriots were more effective at converting passing opportunities into touchdowns, while the Texans struggled to protect the football.
How to Read These Player Stats Correctly
For readers using box scores to evaluate football performances, a few simple principles help avoid misleading conclusions.
- Start with the final score. It establishes the outcome but does not explain the reasons behind it.
- Compare passing efficiency. Completion percentage, yards per attempt, touchdowns, and interceptions provide more context than passing yards alone.
- Examine rushing production. Attempts and yards per carry reveal whether the ground game helped sustain drives.
- Look at targets as well as catches. A receiver’s workload can help explain why two players with similar yardage had different roles.
- Separate sacks from coverage statistics. Sacks indicate plays where the passer was brought down behind the line of scrimmage, while passes defended reflect disruption of throws.
- Consider turnover impact. Interceptions and lost fumbles can eliminate scoring chances and sometimes create defensive points.
- Read special teams in context. Punt placement, field goals, and returns influence field position, but their significance depends on game situations.
The ESPN box score for Texans vs Patriots provides the supplied statistical reference for the contest. For a deeper review of individual plays, a play-by-play record is more useful than a box score alone because it shows the sequence and context of each possession.
FAQs About Texans vs New England Patriots Match Player Stats
1. What was the final score of the Texans vs Patriots game?
The New England Patriots defeated the Houston Texans 28-16 in the AFC Divisional Playoffs on January 19, 2026, according to the supplied ESPN box score data.
2. How many passing yards did C.J. Stroud record?
C.J. Stroud recorded 212 passing yards on 20 completions from 47 attempts. He threw one touchdown and four interceptions.
3. How many touchdowns did Drake Maye throw?
Drake Maye threw three touchdown passes on 16 completions from 27 attempts. He finished with 179 passing yards and one interception.
4. Who was the leading rusher in the game?
Rhamondre Stevenson led the listed rushers with 70 yards on 16 carries for New England. He averaged 4.4 yards per carry, and his longest run was 20 yards.
5. Which receiver recorded the most receiving yards?
Kayshon Boutte led New England with 75 receiving yards on three catches. For Houston, Jayden Higgins led the listed receivers with 59 yards on six catches.
6. How many interceptions did the Patriots record?
The supplied team defensive statistics credit New England with four interceptions. Carlton Davis III recorded two, while Marcus Jones and Craig Woodson recorded one each. Jones also returned an interception for a touchdown.
Conclusion
The texans vs new england patriots match player stats show that New England’s 28-16 victory was built on scoring efficiency, better rushing production, and a defense that repeatedly disrupted Houston’s passing game.
Drake Maye’s three touchdown passes and Rhamondre Stevenson’s 70 rushing yards helped the Patriots establish offensive balance. Kayshon Boutte, Stefon Diggs, and DeMario Douglas each recorded a receiving touchdown, giving New England multiple scoring threats. On defense, four interceptions, 14 passes defended, and Marcus Jones’ interception-return touchdown proved especially significant.
Houston had positive individual performances, including C.J. Stroud’s 212 passing yards, Jayden Higgins’ team-leading 59 receiving yards, and five defensive sacks. However, Stroud’s four interceptions and the Texans’ 48 rushing yards limited their ability to turn those contributions into a comeback.
Ultimately, the statistics demonstrate why football results depend on more than total yardage. New England generated more touchdowns, gained more rushing yards, and created more turnovers. Houston’s field-goal accuracy and defensive pressure were not enough to overcome those disadvantages.
